When prone position is contraindicated or not preferable, can supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy solve the problem?

PURPOSE: To assess safety and efficacy of supine percutaneous nephrolithotomy in patients for whom prone position or general anesthesia is contraindicated or not preferable due to associated comorbidities, overweight or ipsilateral upper ureteric calculi. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty two patients (37 males and 15 females, mean age 33 ± 10.2 years) were included in this study. Supine position was selected due to anesthetic considerations (preexisting compromised cardiopulmonary status, morbid obesity (body mass index > 40 kg/m²) and/or other associated medical comorbidities), impossible prone position due to bone deformities or associated ipsilateral upper ureteric stone. Regional anesthesia was used in 24 patients while 28 patients underwent general anesthesia. After standard cystoscopy and retrograde ureteropyelography in the dorsal lithotomy position, the position was modified using 3 liters of saline bag below the ipsilateral upper flank. Percutaneous access to the pelvicalyceal system was performed through the posterior axillary line under fluoroscopic guidance. RESULTS: Successful renal puncture was achieved in all cases. Single access via the lower calyx was the most commonly used access (36 cases). Stone-free rate was 92.3%. Postoperative complications classified according to Clavien Dindo classification included bleeding requiring transfusion (3.8%), urinary leakage requiring ureteric stenting (5.8%), prolonged fever (7.7%), deep venous thrombosis (1.9%) [grade III in all] and urinary leakage requiring ureteric stenting (5.8%) [grade IIIa]. CONCLUSIONS: The modified supine position for percutaneous nephrolithotomy is a safe and effective option that offers several advantages with an excellent outcome. It can be performed safely for morbidly obese patients and those with cardiopulmonary compromise

Risks and benefits of the intercostal approach for percutaneous nephrolithotripsy

OBJECTIVE:The objective of our retrospective study was to provide evidence on the efficacy of the intercostal versus subcostal access route for percutaneous nephrolithotripsy. MATERIAL AND METHODS: 642 patients underwent nephrolithotomy or nephrolithotripsy from 1996 to 2005. A total of 127 had an intercostal access tract (11th or 12th); 515 had a subcostal access tract. RESULTS: Major complications included one pneumothorax (1.0%), one arterio-calyceal fistula (1.0%) and three arteriovenous fistulae (2.7%) for intercostal upper pole access; two pneumothoraces (1.7%), one arteriovenous fistula (1.0%), one pseudoaneurysm (1.0%), one ruptured uretero-pelvic junction (1.0%), 4 perforated ureters (3.4%) for subcostal upper pole access; one hemothorax (1.6%), one colo-calyceal fistula (1.6%), one AV fistula (1.6%), and two perforated ureters (3.2%) with subcostal interpolar access. Diffuse bleeding from the tract with a subcostal interpolar approach occurred 3.2% of the time compared with 2.4% with a lower pole approach. Staghorn calculi demonstrated similar rates of complications. CONCLUSION: Considering the advantages that the intercostal access route offers the surgeon, it is reasonable to recommend its use after proper pre-procedural assessment of the anatomy, and particularly the respiratory lung motion